Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Clin Exp Emerg Med ; 11(1): 68-78, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37439139

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Agriculture is a hazardous industry. However, previous studies have focused on injuries to agricultural workers without comparison with injuries to nonagricultural workers. Therefore, we compared the clinical characteristics and outcomes of injuries reported at an emergency department (ED) between agricultural workers and nonagricultural workers. METHODS: We established a prospective ED-based agricultural injury surveillance system at a tertiary university hospital. Adult patients visiting the ED for an injury were divided into farmer and non-farmer groups depending on their engagement with agriculture. Using an adjusted multivariate analysis and propensity score matching (age, sex, inhabitant, and insurance type), we compared the clinical characteristics and outcomes of injuries between the farmer and non-farmer groups. RESULTS: In total, 38,556 injured adult patients (37,746 in the non-farmer group and 810 in the farmer group) were available for the unmatched sample analysis. The 1,620 matched subjects were equally classified after one-to-one nearest-neighbor propensity score matching. A multivariate logistic regression analysis of the unmatched sample revealed higher adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for intensive care unit admission (adjusted OR, 1.752; P=0.003) and overall surgery (adjusted OR, 1.870; P<0.001) in the farmer group. In contrast, univariate logistic regression analyses of the propensity score-matched sample found a higher OR in the farmer group only for overall surgery (OR, 1.786; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Injuries of agricultural workers had higher odds only of requiring surgery; differences in injury-related mortality between groups were not statistically significant in either the matched or unmatched sample analyses.

2.
Clin Exp Emerg Med ; 10(2): 213-223, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36787902

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the hospital diagnoses and characteristics of uncooperative prehospital patients suspected of acute stroke who could not undergo a prehospital stroke screening test (PHSST). METHODS: This retrospective observational study was conducted at a single academic hospital with a regional stroke center. We analyzed three scenario-based prehospital stroke screening performances using the final hospital diagnoses: (1) a conservative approach only in patients who underwent the PHSST, (2) a real-world approach that considered all uncooperative patients as screening positive, and (3) a contrapositive approach that all uncooperative patients were considered as negative. RESULTS: Of the 2,836 emergency medical services (EMS)-transported adult patients who met the prehospital criteria for suspicion of acute stroke, 486 (17.1%) were uncooperative, and 570 (20.1%) had a confirmed final diagnosis of acute stroke. The diagnosis in the uncooperative group did not differ from that in the cooperative group (22.0% vs. 19.7%, P=0.246). The diagnostic performances of the PHSST in the conservative approach were as follows: 79.5% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI], 75.5%-83.1%), 90.2% specificity (95% CI, 88.8%-91.6%), and 0.849 area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC; 95% CI, 0.829-0.868). The sensitivity and specificity were 83.3% (95% CI, 80.0%-86.3%) and 75.2% (95% CI, 73.3%-76.9%), respectively, in the real-world approach and 64.6% (95% CI, 60.5%-68.5%) and 91.9% (95% CI, 90.7%-93.0%), respectively, in the contrapositive approach. No significant difference was evident in the AUC between the real-world approach and the contrapositive approach (0.792 [95% CI, 0.775-0.810] vs. 0.782 [95% CI, 0.762-0.803], P>0.05). CONCLUSION: We found overestimation (false positive) and underestimation (false negative) in the uncooperative group depending on the scenario-based EMS stroke screening policy for uncooperative prehospital patients suspected of acute stroke.

3.
Clin Exp Emerg Med ; 8(2): 94-102, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34237814

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether there is a difference in mortality and medical resource utilization between geriatric (aged ≥65 years) and super-geriatric patients (aged ≥80 years) with traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: We obtained comprehensive data (demographics, injury characteristics, injury severities, and outcomes) of geriatric and super-geriatric TBI patients from an emergency department-based injury surveillance system database from 2011 to 2016. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to compare the mortality and nonroutine discharge (NRDC) status between both groups. RESULTS: Among 442,533 TBI patients, 48,624 were older than 65 years. A total of 48,446 patients (37,140 geriatric and 11,306 super-geriatric) without exclusion criteria were included in the final analysis. Both overall in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28 to 2.74; P=0.001) and NRDC (adjusted odds ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.71; P=0.011) were significantly higher in the super-geriatric group. In the stratified analysis, there were no significant differences in NRDC rate for all stratifications of treatment timing (emergency department vs. ward admission), but mortality remained to be significant for all stratifications. CONCLUSION: Super-geriatric TBI patients showed a significantly higher risk-adjusted overall mortality and more inadequate medical resource utilization than did geriatric TBI patients. However, super-geriatric patients were more likely to undergo NRDC after admission; thus, further research about age-related health inequalities is needed in the treatment of super-geriatric patients.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...